With international intervention plugged in, Egypt gotta spare time to deliberate its reviving, strangling the unfinished possibility of peace talks. Now the problem will turn to negotiating inside and signing a peace treaty. I admit that without international inference no agreement can be reached, likewise the Israel-Palestine predicament. However, the world must act in a punchy way, directing Egypt's peace process along with a mailed fist or economy aiding cut-off would be enough, not a babysitter.

For a struggling nation desperately revive the peace process, what Sissi has required to be done just grasped Egypt's vein and now they can barely breath. Who can provide guarantee that this military suppression won't lead to another extremist of dictatorship? Power and the followed satisfactory controller can lure themselves to be monsters, more ruthless than beasts. It's true that "neoliberals on his side, Sisi is probably the last conservative military goon who can stop the terrorists", but 1. neoliberal is on self-regard, then comes altruism, as military goon Sissi doesn't possessed that awareness; 2. since the Arab Spring, Egypt no longer acquired the entitlement of holding on neoliberal, considering the chaos has interrupted its formal course. Just my point, welcome to communicate.

The Western Media loudly arguing doing this and that for intervening on behalf of the Jihadist bros as in their best national interests are actually now in a confused state of mind. The Beast has actually left the public befuddled by his lack of a cohorent policy on the Jihadist bros and terrorists.

Like the past and present imperialists into the Great game of Central Asia, it is unlikely the Beast will listen to anyone even though he does not even have a cohorent international policy on the Islamic bros and the Salafi terrorists who are also mentored by his main Wahhabi Saudi and Gulf allies.

These are all good comments. Though I think US media does not give the full picture. We don't know what the Morsey people were planning to do and what the trigger was. Just saying. I think the bigger problem is lack of stability in the region. We now have Eygpt, Lebanon, Syria and Iraq all in turmoil. Eygpt has a population of over 70M so 500 people is nothing. I think its a long road for many of these countries but hopefully it will end here. I do think though that its weird we don't have a stronger influence at the moment with these countries (at least this is what we can see). I understand Obama's policy about democracy, but human rights is something else.

I pray for all those families that lost a loved one. I hope they find solace and god gives them patience to get through this difficult time.

The right thing to do now is cut off military aid from America, and left Egypt make their own decision, for international power involved would cause another sort of map. Interference would only disperse the conviction of Egypt to solve their sectarian hatred and accordingly political disparity.

Views approached by the author is in accord with mine. This is an absolutely deviated tactical mistake. Since the Arab Spring outbreak, suppression on behalf of government has evolved toward a civil war, for power abuse arbitrary had twisted the soul of ruling party. Political reason and religious conflict mixed in the history of whirlpool, whether analyzed from either side, are no longer the root cause of such a bloody face. Inside the mosque-turned-morgue, what military chief Gen Abdel-Fatah el-Sissi has destroyed, among the civilians killed in streets and corresponding rights rolled back, outraged relatives of lying bodies under deadly force. The government resort to weapon, caught alliance with preach and radicalised recruit, which crushed their further suppression downward another vicious circle that led to a deprived nation. It is coward act, for not only people of its nation has been deprived of freedom, the nation itself has been dragged into being-deprived somewhere until no leftover. Egypst's Islamist consists of the country's history and dim future, though barely visible, and its not wise to withdrawal them until such coup turned to be a civil war.

Yep. It's because even illiterate people want to eat, and to avoid violence.

So they vote for the people who can deliver, even if those politicians are extremely corrupt and ineffective.

India has not had a famine in decades, it's economy has been growing at a very high rate year after year (even during the global recession), and literacy rates are only going up. Eventually, the population will be as informed as their western counterparts, and the level of their politics will correspondingly rise.

It all goes back to people wanting the basics though -- everybody wants their children to eat and go to school, and if their votes matter, opportunistic and self-interested politicians will give them that. Those children will be educated and demand more, and their children more.

It's the story of democratic progression pretty much everywhere in the world, from the US to Latin America to Eastern Europe during recent decades.

Remember, even if the Gulf states give Egypt more money, virtually every single Gulf nation is a US client state. They all listen to and do what the US says, at least enough to appear loyal (so they can quietly act against US interests as they always do).

If the US government actually wanted the tap cut off, they could have it done in a day. The Saudis, Qataris, Emiratis, and Bahrainis all have much greater interest in preserving their ties with the US than anything that happens in Egypt. After all, all these countries see Iran as a looming existential threat and they need the US to protect them.

Meanwhile, the MB -- while dangerous -- cannot even stay in power for a full term in a poor and weak country.

In other words, let the USA do what it has been doing for decades the world over - support pro-US dictators the world over, like Pinochet, Iran's Shah, Sukarno and many others, and sell them weapons to crush their people in the name of stability.

Mixed what up, exactly? I am not Muslim and I am not Arab. There are plenty of Muslim Egyptians that are not of Arab descent. There was no great genocide of indigenous Egyptians under the Arabs. Arabs moved in and settled, but even according to Herodotus there were Arabs settled in Egypt previous to the Ptolemeic Era, and they had taken Egyptian and/or Greek names. Of course, this was pre-Islam and pre-Christian, so the agenda was quite different.

You mean like MB would allow free elections and accept the results? That is at least naive and at the same time dangerous. You seem to believe that the choices available were:
1. waiting for elections and hope for the win of other less backward and violent force
2. military coup
In reality MB would have to face the problems it failed to solve and instead even aggravated. Most likely reaction would be more violence and for the military and police the choice would then be either to oppress the opposition to MB or to oppose MB. They chose the later. I do not blame them even if I do not believe in their hones intentions. Still they claimed to want to organize elections soon etc something that MB was not ready to do. I am afraid the civil war or hopefully only civil unrest was always unavoidable. The question is - are the generals skilled enough and do they have will strong enough to actually try to arrange for new elections as soon as situation stabilizes?